« Bending the Rules for a Bank on Bedford Bathroom Reno #1: $3,000 Goes A Long Way »
November 15, 2007
Rentals for 467 Vanderbilt Avenue
After several months of appearing finished, there was some action at 467 Vanderbilt Avenue this week in the form of a banner proclaiming the building open for rental business. Our phone message for the broker wasn't returned but a reader pointed us in the direction of a website for the project. Turns out that there are eight two-bedrooms priced from $2,500 to $3,000 a month. While it's not the prettiest building around (it does get points for being reasonably respectful of its context, though), given the location, we suspect these will rent fairly easily if the interior finishes are decent. While relatively benign for a Bricolage design, the building is—curiously—overbuilt by 6,700 square feet, according to PropertyShark's calculations. As mentioned by a commenter in an earlier post, Henry Radusky (the big boss man at Bricolage) has a Scarano-like knack for squeezing FAR out of thin air; in this case, it was suggested that the extra space might have something to do with building (or claiming to build) medical office space on the ground floor. We have no information on that either way. Anyone know?
Gates and Vandy: Neither Grim Nor Dandy [Brownstoner] GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2910
Comments
"it does get points for being reasonably respectful of its context, though"....
sorry but this is an architectural catastrophe!
check out the website pics - the facade facing greene seems more like the prominent face, yet the entrance is tucked in on the vanderbilt side underneath a very odd porch! it's like the building is doing the twist or something. no order whatsoever.
what a frikkin shame. so much architectural history and references to pull from nearby (not to mention knowledgeable designers), and yet crap like this still gets cranked out and approved!!!
yes it's brick, yes it's not the worst new construction. but it in no way is contextual! it's very weak and misappropriated design at the least.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 10:29 AM
fair points. all we meant is that in terms of height and facades. the actual design is another matter altogether.
Posted by: brownstoner at November 15, 2007 10:31 AM
This building is a screeching horror-show, able to drive those who gaze upon it to madness. It's a formless protoplasm able to mock and reflect all forms and organs and processes - viscous agglutinations of bubbling cells - rubbery fifteen-foot spheroids infinitely plastic and ductile - slaves of suggestion, builders of cities - more and more sullen, more and more intelligent, more and more amphibious, more and more imitative! Great God! What madness made even those blasphemous Developers willing to use and carve such things?
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 10:52 AM
I don't see anything wrong with the exterior. It could have been far worse. Darker red brick is the key.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 11:07 AM
it's not as bad as the monstrosity on fulton (near nostrand), but it's definitely a close relative.
ny is so far behind in progressive and quality residential construction is all.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 11:26 AM
All new buildings suck. Landmark everything. I love vacant lots. Buck Fush. Free Mumia.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 12:32 PM
Troll, back to your cave.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 12:47 PM
website looks pretty cool anyway...
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 3:28 PM
On the overbuilt comment, there are multiple reasons it can appear that way while not actually being overbuilt. For one, the square footage numbers in property shark are very often wrong. But even if they are right, not all square footage in a building counts towards the calculation of FAR. For instance, elevator shafts and storage space do not.
I believe Property Shark pulls it's square footage numbers from the Dept. of Finance while it is DOB that does a calculation of FAR. Each one counts square footage different ways and for different purposes.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 5:48 PM
YOu guys are idiots. This is another creation from the Hasdiac community to maintain money filtering into their community. I cannot believe people are so gullible to even rent in these cheaply made buildings with apts not worth the price their asking for. Damn are you so blind that you have to rent at such high prices for shyt holes.
Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 7:00 PM
i've done a lot of apartment searching in the neighborhood and they aren't asking any more than anyone else in the area and the apartments on the inside are looking great. Elevators open up into the apartment. Decent MB, small Second Bedroom. Large LR, Open Kitchen. Plus Utility Closet and closets in each bedroom. W/D Hookups and DW. Pretty certain we are getting one. Sorry.
Posted by: guest at December 8, 2007 9:05 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.